Common Sense

David Kurten: To what extent have your policies and statements as Mayor reflected common sense?

Sadiq Khan: Everything I have done over the past five years has been done with Londoners’ best interests at heart. I have kept my promise to stand up for London and we have made some big changes that have improved our city in important ways.
It is common sense to protect London’s environment. We have reduced toxic air pollution by a third, declared a climate emergency and protected our green spaces and we are delivering a five-fold increase in cycle lanes.
It is common sense to provide the affordable homes Londoners need. We have started to build more new council homes than in any year since 1983, have stood up for leaseholders caught in the cladding scandal and are campaigning for the introduction of rent controls.
It is common sense to keep the costs of living down. We have introduced the Hopper bus fare and have frozen all TfL fares across five years, saving Londoners over £200.
It is common sense to be tough on crime and tough on the causes of crime. We have put over 1,000 additional officers on London’s streets and have invested over £17million in youth and sports clubs to create more opportunities for young Londoners.
It is common sense to stand up for London’s values and make this city a welcoming place for everyone and I have done just that, banging the drum for London as an outward-facing, progressive and open city in the face of Brexit, battling for a fair deal for London from this anti-London Government and standing up to bullies like DonaldTrump [former President of the United States], who want to sow division where there should be none.
I am incredibly proud that Londoners have stood together through all this, showing their values of openness, tolerance and supportiveness through even the most trying of times. Some members use the words ‘common sense’ when they really just mean the personal opinion they hold.

David Kurten: Good morning, MrMayor. You put out a tweet last year in February [2020] saying this:
“Trans women are women. Trans men are men. Non-binary people are non-binary. All gender identities are valid.”
I read that and I know a lot of people read that and probably didn’t have the foggiest what you were talking about, but it seems to appear that you think that men who say they are women are actually women and women who say they are men are actually men. I want to see what you actually think about this. Do some women have male reproductive organs?

Sadiq Khan: You are in danger of conflating sex and gender. In relation to gender, people should be able to define themselves. I said it knowing full well that one out of four trans teenagers try to kill themselves. This is a group of Londoners and people across our country who should be supported rather than ridiculed, as you are seeking to do.

David Kurten: I am not. I am simply trying to find out your opinions. You have dodged the question. You have not answered the question. Do some women, MrMayor, have male reproductive organs?

Sadiq Khan: As I explained, you are conflating sex and gender. One’s biology at birth often is not the gender one chooses to have. That is why it is important to provide a supportive environment to those people who either are transitioning or are trans.

David Kurten: What about the other way around? Can some men get pregnant and give birth?

Sadiq Khan: What you are in danger of doing is trying to incite hatred against a group of people that I care passionately about. As far as I am concerned, trans rights are human rights. I proudly stand against any abuse directed towards trans people and the wider lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, queer, plus (LGBTQ+) community. It may seem funny to you and a good way of playing to a certain audience. I am not going to have it.

David Kurten: MrMayor, I am simply asking you the question to find out what you think and you simply have not answered my question. If I said to you, MrMayor, “I am a woman”, would you recognise that I am a woman?

Sadiq Khan: If you decided to call yourself a woman, David, and you wanted to transition to a woman, I would help in any way I could. The idea, though, for you to make some cheap points on an issue that is really important to a lot of people ‑‑ a lot of people suffer extreme anxiety and go through real turmoil when they go through a transition, only for people like you to ridicule them. It is not really on, David, to use this platform in this way. I am not going to amplify those sorts of messages.

David Kurten: MrMayor, I want to find out what you think because this is an issue that people have opinions on and I want to find out your opinions. There is also a move to change the language. For example, the NHS wants to remove words like ‘mother’ and ‘pregnant’ and, instead of calling people ‘pregnant women’, wants to call people ‘pregnant people’. Do you support moves to remove words like ‘women’ and ‘mother’ from the language?

Sadiq Khan: I have not seen what you are referring to.

David Kurten: There have been lots of reports, for example, that certain NHS areas are trying to remove so that we do not have ‘maternity’ services anymore. They want to change things. ‘Breastfeeding’ is becoming ‘chest-feeding’, for example. Would you support changing the language so that‑‑

Caroline Russell: Chair, can I raise a point of order?

David Kurten: Chair, I am being interrupted --

Caroline Russell: I believe this is improper and I believe it constitutes a breach of our Standing Orders, section 2.10(B)(2).

Navin Shah: The Member has a right to intervene. Please go ahead, AssemblyMember.

Caroline Russell: We are hearing very discriminatory language here and I think the Member should not be further heard.

Léonie Cooper: I would second that suggestion from AssemblyMemberRussell. This is appalling. Also, the Mayor has no responsibility for the NHS and the reports about these matters have been proven to be incorrect in any case. This is completely inappropriate for this Assembly to be listening to.

Navin Shah: AssemblyMemberKurten, I do believe that actually your words are very offensive comments which are not acceptable and therefore can you please move on? If you have any other issue or any item of questioning, please ask that to the Mayor.

David Kurten: Chair, I am simply asking questions about things that are happening in London and things that the Mayor has tweeted about and things that he has an opinion about. Everybody should be allowed to ask questions of the Mayor and see what he thinks. He does have some responsibility for healthcare and health inequalities. I would put that question to the Mayor again. Does he support those changes in language?

Navin Shah: Look, the Mayor has answered your question. Please move on. I have given my ruling. I do find your line of questioning and the way you are putting it offensive to many. Therefore, if you do not have any other questions, I would like us to move on.

David Kurten: I do not have any other questions on any other topic.

Navin Shah: All right. Thank you. AssemblyMemberBoff, you had a supplementary on this particular question?

Total cost of Silvertown Road Tunnel to Londoners

Siân Berry: What will the total cost to Londoners of the Silvertown Road Tunnel be?

Sadiq Khan: Investment in the Silvertown Tunnel will bring widespread benefits to London, none of which will be realised if the contract is cancelled. Suggestions that the money being spent on this scheme could be invested elsewhere are misleading and inaccurate. The scheme is funded by private finance, which simply cannot be reallocated.
Finally addressing the longstanding issues at the Blackwall Tunnel will hugely reduce - if not effectively eliminate - congestion in the area, improve air quality overall and support economic growth in east London by transforming access to cross-river public transport. The health and economic costs to Londoners of congestion at the worn-out Blackwall Tunnel are huge. The Tunnel has to be closed about 700 times a year. If it closes for even six minutes, a queue quickly extends for three miles. Around 1million hours are wasted each year as a result, costing around £10million in lost time for people and businesses. These roads also suffer from some of the worst air quality in London and this is exacerbated by the congestion and regular queuing. Doing nothing is not an option.
TfL awarded a design/build/finance/maintain contract to the RiverLinx Consortium at the end of 2019. RiverLinx Ltd has secured £1.2billion in finance to cover design, construction, risk and other expenditure on the project. Only once the Tunnel has been built and is open will TfL begin to make repayments to RiverLinx. This means that TfL is not liable for additional payments for delays in the same way as more traditional construction contracts. RiverLinx will be responsible for the maintenance and renewal of the systems and equipment over 25 years. TfL anticipates that revenue received from user charging at the Blackwall and Silvertown Tunnels will more than cover annual payments to RiverLinx, which are contingent on performance. Any surplus will be reinvested in the transport network.
Even as traffic has decreased dramatically on some roads in London during the COVID-19 pandemic, congestion has continued at the Blackwall Tunnel. In fact, the Tunnel has had to be closed over 420 times since the pandemic began. This demonstrates the importance of a reliable and resilient crossing in that part of London. This vital river crossing will reduce congestion and transform cross-river public transport connections and improve some of the worst air quality anywhere in London.

Siân Berry: Thank you, MrMayor. Before I start, I wanted to say from the Green Group thank you for answering - for the most part - our questions really constructively this term. We have had some good discussions and influence. When I think about the previous Mayor’s attitude to scrutiny, including and especially from some of the women Members, I wanted to highlight that I appreciate the difference.
Today might not be our most agreeable session, however, because of the topic. I really wanted to focus on costs here. I have been looking over the audit report from Ernst & Young and there are three things that I want to put to you that do still worry me about the costs that Londoners might pay out for Silvertown in the end.
Firstly, on tolls, the report says there is a deficit in the toll income right up until 2040. That is around £1million of deficit to cover until then.
Secondly, on changes to the contract, TfL has already listed two contract variations in its transparency data, both paid to RiverLinx, totalling around £10million. These seem to be in addition to the main contract.
Thirdly, on construction risk, I am not convinced this is covered. Are Londoners liable if this tunnelling goes wrong? It is a very high-risk project, as far as I can tell. It is wide tunnel to take heavy goods vehicles (HGVs) two abreast. It is much more serious than a Tube tunnel. It could easily hit problems.
If we are liable for construction risk, variations to the contract and this tolling deficit that is in the report, what are you telling future Mayors the total bill for Silvertown is going to be?

Sadiq Khan: You raise a number of points, as even you would concede, in your question and so give me a chance to respond to them.
First, we are quite clear that the benefits of using this model of design/build/finance/maintain are far better than any alternatives. You will appreciate that the normal way construction is done in transport is often by TfL having to borrow and then build. Normally‑‑

Siân Berry: Yes, but I am aware that the Department for Transport (DfT) stopped using private finance initiatives (PFI) a while ago.

Sadiq Khan: I am still trying to answer the first of your questions. The advantage of this type of contract is that there is an incentive by the company constructing it in the issue of maintenance because it will be in charge of maintenance for the next 25 years. Normally, in a build/construct contract, there is only the contractual incentive to make sure it is a good product. Because it is in charge of the maintenance for 25 years, there is an incentive to make sure that construction is done well. Also, you will appreciatethat the contract involves design, build, finance and maintenance. The consortium is responsible for those things. Clearly, if there is a difference of opinion, it will be resolved either amicably or, if need be, through any contractual issues through the courts. I am quite clear that by the consortium being liable for the build and construction, it takes the pressure off TfL. Clearly, we will be keen to make sure the construction is done well, but there is a self-interest in the consortium doing it well because it will be maintaining it for the next 25 years.

Siân Berry: You have not, I am afraid, answered any of those three points about the tolling deficit and the potential construction risks. I notice that TfL already has capital costs of about £200million in there. We do not know. You will not release the cancellation costs. Looking at what I have said there, if, for example, it was to run a third overbudget like Crossrail, we would be looking at £700million in extra costs there. There is £100million in tolling deficit. It seems to me that even now it might be cheaper for you and for future Mayors if you were to cancel it now. I have run out of time there but I --

Sadiq Khan: You have asserted things that are untrue. You cannot assert things that are untrue to get a clip for social media and not give a chance to respond. A number of your assertions are simply not true.

Siân Berry: There is not £200million --

Sadiq Khan: Chair, I am in your hands. If Members want to use their time in asserting things that are untrue until they run out of time, I am not sure how it makes a meaningful Mayor’s Question Time, but hey-ho.

Siân Berry: OK. I will send you the three pieces of information that I have that so you can answer then.

Sadiq Khan: I am sure you are going to press-release me, yes.

Siân Berry: I am out of time, though. Thank you very much.

Len Duvall: Sorry, point of order, Chair. The Green Group is not out of time, according to my timer, so the Mayor can answer the question. The Member has put legitimate questions of concern and the Mayor should be able to respond. The Green Group is not out of time.

Navin Shah: That is true.

Siân Berry: Can the Mayor answer in one word whether or not there is a tolling deficit?

Sadiq Khan: Chair, the idea that I will be dictated to about how many words I can use to answer a question is ridiculous. The point is the Member has had a long opportunity to make assertions that are simply untrue. The best word that I can say is ‘untrue’.

Siân Berry: OK. If you cannot answer me succinctly in more detail than that, you have signed this contract and I do not know what --

Sadiq Khan: Your question was longer than the time you gave me to answer.

Navin Shah: Look, certainly the Mayor is prepared to give details but, as you are saying, because of the time taken for all of that, we will move on now to the next question.

TfL Funding

Alison Moore: Why is a sustainable funding arrangement so crucial to TfL?

Sadiq Khan: Before I respond, I want to thank AssemblyMemberDr Moore for her service. She has been a great representative for Londoners and an excellent Chair of the Transport Committee. I know she will continue her work on housing, regeneration and economic development in her role as a Councillor in Barnet, as well as her campaigning on road safety and air quality.
In January [2021], TfL published its plan setting out how it could become financially sustainable by 2023/24. That plan demonstrates the critical role of TfL to the city’s economic, social and environmental health and forms the basis of discussions with the Government ahead of the current funding agreement expiry, which happens in two weeks. Put simply, there will be no recovery for London without a properly funded TfL. As London’s economy represents 23% of the country’s gross national product (GDP) and investment in transport here supports job and growth across the UK, including 43,000 jobs nationwide through the Tube investment programme alone, it is in the national interest that TfL is properly funded.
With the support of the Assembly, I have asked that the Government lets us retain the Vehicle Excise Duty (VED) paid by Londoners. It is a reasonable request that all parties here in London support, but so far it has been dismissed.
The pandemic has decimated TfL’s finances and has shown it can no longer be forced to rely so heavily on fares revenue. Sustainable funding is needed. Any talk of reducing services to save money is completely counterproductive. We need to run as full a service as possible to support social distancing and protect health. We also need to ensure that public transport remains a convenient and attractive option to avoid a car-led recovery that would replace one health crisis with another. I am grateful to the Confederation of British Industry (CBI), London First, the London Chamber of Commerce, the Federation of Small Businesses (FSB), the Trades Union Congress (TUC), the Transport Salaried Staffs’ Association (TSSA) and others adding their voices to the calls on the Government to provide the funding TfL needs.
The transport network is our city’s beating heart and the envy of the world. Starving the capital of investment will do nothing but jeopardise the whole country’s recovery from the pandemic. We must not let that happen.

Alison Moore: Thank you very much, MrMayor, and thank you for those kind comments you made.
I want to pick up a number of those areas. MrMayor, the Government still refuses to publish the
taxpayer-funded KPMG report and you referred to your Financial Sustainability Plan but, as we heard at the TfL Board this week, the Government has not given any substantive or real feedback on that report.
How do you respond - or can you respond - to the Government’s demands when you do not know the basis for them?

Sadiq Khan: It is very difficult. You have met our Commissioner [for Transport for London]. He is an incredibly passionate and reasonable Commissioner and his team are pulling their hair out because the financial year ends literally in two weeks and we have nothing from the Government. What we have is numerous questions that have not been responded to.
What I would say to the Government is that it is in nobody’s interests for us to go to the wire. It is in nobody’s interests for London’s businesses to be starved of the work of TfL. It is in everyone’s interests to sort this out. The sooner we start negotiating meaningfully, the sooner we can get a deal over the line and the sooner we can work towards a rapid recovery. We want to be part of the solution, not the problem.

Alison Moore: I understand that you are trying to be constructive, but one view of this failure to publish or respond is that it allows the Conservatives to play fast and loose with the facts. I wanted to address some suggestions made by the Conservative Group budget amendment. You will agree that sustainable funding relies on accurate data.
In its budget amendment, the Conservative Group suggested nominee passes cost £46million, temporarily reduced to £28million to take account of the effect of the pandemic, but in previous years it has claimed the cost was £44million, £33million, £32million and £24million. Do these estimates sound accurate or are they just making things up as they go along?

Sadiq Khan: They are fantasy figures. Each day, I see new figures from the Conservative candidate running to be the Mayor and from the Conservative Group. If that is how they are going to have their figures, in a fantasy way, can you imagine if they are in charge of TfL? No wonder the previous Mayor - I know AssemblyMember TonyArbour does not like me denigrating his friend - borrowed more than £7billion. He does not like me mentioning the cost of the garden bridge, which was neither a garden nor a bridge, as LéonieCooper [AM] said. That is why it is really important to have proper figures.
We really are keen to work with the DfT, which is trying its best to challenge the Treasury, but it is in everyone’s interests for TfL, the DfT and Treasury to reach a deal so that London’s businesses have confidence going forward. The fantasy figures are not taken seriously by businesses or by sensible people in the Government.

Alison Moore: Thank you very much, MrMayor. I am running out of time and so I will leave the questions there. Thank you.

London Power

Tony Arbour: How have you encouraged Londoners to take up London Power?

Sadiq Khan: Thank you for your question, AssemblyMemberArbour. At this, your last Mayor’s Question Time, I want to thank you for your 21 years of service on the Assembly, including two periods as Chairman. In this time, you have campaigned and scrutinised for Londoners on numerous issues including, recently, your support for boats on the Thames, your opposition to Heathrow [Airport] expansion and your work on listing City Hall. You have got me involved in all three of those things, I hasten to add. From planning to policing, the environment to the economy, you have sat on or chaired almost every committee in the Assembly’s history and your vast historical and local knowledge of South West London has been invaluable and we appreciated you standing up for your constituents. I add, Chair, that although I have often been at the receiving end of his wit and sarcasm, I will miss him and I wish him the best of luck in the future.
To the question, according to the Office of Gas and Electricity Markets (Ofgem), Londoners are amongst the most likely people in Britain to have prepayment meters and are amongst the least likely to switch energy suppliers, leading to higher prices and reduced access to good deals. We set up London Power to give Londoners access to energy that is always fair, always affordable and always green, with excellent customer service. There are no exit fees, 100% renewable electricity is standard and there is automatic rollover into the cheapest similar tariff. London Power was launched in January2020 and, since then, over 5,000 Londoners have signed up. They are saving an average of £209 per year.
The marketing campaign for London Power began in 2020 using digital, social media, print and radio adverts, billboards and direct mail. This was paused in March2020 due to the pandemic but, as energy bills rose across the year, it was restarted in a limited way in September2020, focusing on digital and radio advertising. Alongside the pan-London marketing activity, local activity has included targeted postcard drops, social media and email advertising, and outreach to borough energy and money advice services on a smaller scale than was the case had the pandemic not happened.
Too many Londoners still pay too much for their energy bills and many live in fuel poverty and so we have made sure our offers work for low-income and vulnerable Londoners. The most affordable plan is linked to the cheapest 10% of tariffs in the market, with customers on this plan saving £243 on average a year. This is in fact the cheapest prepayment tariff on the market.

Tony Arbour: Thank you, MrMayor. Can I particularly thank you for your comments at the beginning. Yes, we have often crossed swords. I have always enjoyed it. We should be a proper debating chamber and that is why it is unfortunate that my final year has turned out in a way to be a disappointment. Debating in this way is not the right way to exercise democracy.
However, in relation to my question, do you know how many households there are in London, MrMayor?

Sadiq Khan: Not off the top of my head, but they go up all the time because of the separation of houses in multiple occupancy (HMOs) into flats. I am not sure.

Tony Arbour: It is around 4million households. Do you know how many new households - that is in the sense of new developments, each one of which could be classified as a household - were created in the last year?

Sadiq Khan: I would have to hazard a guess. I could not be as precise as I would like to be.

Tony Arbour: The figure is around 25,000. Are you a customer of London Power?

Sadiq Khan: I am.

Tony Arbour: As a customer of London Power, you will know that you are in a very tiny minority. You have told us that there are 5,000 customers of London Power. That is fewer than one tenth of 1% of Londoners. Do you know how much London Power has spent of your money and our money on recruiting those 5,000 subscribers?

Sadiq Khan: I will make this point. Obviously, the marketing was suspended because of the pandemic. I appreciate the criticism. Of course I do. It is a situation where, because of the pandemic, the plans that London Power had and we had needed to be suspended for, I am sure, reasons you would agree with. Clearly, once we have come out of lockdown, marketing will escalate and we will hopefully get more customers signed up to London Power.

Tony Arbour: You say that, MrMayor, but the new households that I have already referred to were new customers who were not signed up to anybody. All of them had the opportunity to sign up to London Power. They, unlike you, have not signed up. Does that not suggest to you that the marketing has not been very successful and that it has in fact been extremely poor value for Londoners and, on the basis that you have already described how wonderful London Power is, you have been unable to attract those people as customers?

Sadiq Khan: You are in danger of confusing the lack of take-up with the service being provided. The marketing has been suspended, which is the explanation for why the numbers of customers are not as high as we would like. I will give you an example. At City Hall itself, our bandwidth over the last year has been focused on the pandemic. For example, within City Hall, the team that would ordinarily be working with London Power to maximise customer uptake has not been there.
What I am saying to you, AssemblyMemberArbour, is that once lockdown is lifted, I am confident that we will restart the marketing and we will see an increase in the number of customers being London Power customers.

Tony Arbour: MrMayor, the truth of the matter is that the parent company of London Power, which is Octopus, is undertaking currently - and, so far as I can tell, has throughout the year been undertaking - a marketing campaign. You as a customer will know that when you contact London Power and when you receive bills from London Power, the reference is to ‘Octopus’. We have spent, according to the last set of accounts, around £3million on London Power. That is a subsidy that amounts, on the number of customers you say London Power has, to around £750,000. This cannot possibly be good value for money. It suggests that Octopus, in effect, has been exploiting the fact that it runs London Power as a marketing ploy for itself rather than for us. Do you have any view on that?

Sadiq Khan: Yes. You are wrong. London Power is marketed as ‘London Power’. There are obviously references to “powered by Octopus Energy”, but London Power is not the only white-label product that Octopus Energy works with. It is a fact that there are a number of services that we provide where the number of customers has not been commensurate with the cost.
I will give you another example. We spend £600million every four weeks providing transport for our city. The number of passengers does not equate to the money spent. There are other examples I could give.

Tony Arbour: That is not an analogy, MrMayor. The power market in London is a free market. People have the option to sign up to whichever supplier they want. You have chosen to subsidise this particular supplier. If you look at the website - and indeed, you say as far as you are concerned, it is London Power that is communicating with you rather than Octopus, it is notable that Greenpeace has separated from its relationship with London Power. If you look at your own website and what it says about London Power and what London Power says about itself, it describes itself as being wonderfully green. It suggests that if it makes a profit - and on the face of it, it is never going to make a profit - the profit it is going to make is going to be distributed for clean power. Greenpeace does not think it is supplying green power.
Can I suggest to you as a parting shot that it is no business of yours and it is no business of the mayoralty to subsidise a company like Octopus with the pretence that it is somehow green and helpful to Londoners?

Sadiq Khan: I disagree. One of our roles as an administration is to support not only the poorest Londoners and also those who are determined to have renewable energy rather than fossil [fuel] burning energy. The commitment we can give as London Power is that we will ensure fair pricing. This means there is a competitive tariff but also, more importantly, when the tariff comes to an end, there is a rollover onto the cheapest similar tariff. That is not something that happens with other companies. Also, we can offer 100% renewable electricity on all plans. That is also something not offered by other companies. When there are profits - you say there will never be profits - they will be reinvested into London communities.

Tony Arbour: There will never be a profit. I believe that this is £3million that you have thrown away. Anyway, thank you very much, MrMayor. That is my valedictory. Thank you.

Sadiq Khan: I was hoping, Chair, to have the experience of the Member on some of the money spent by a previous Mayor on vanity projects like bridges or cable cars or an estuary airport‑‑

Tony Arbour: No, I disapprove of this --

Sadiq Khan: ‑‑but instead we hear criticism about a renewable energy plan and London Power. Hey-ho.

Tony Arbour: We have spoken about your debating technique, which you have sought to use there. All too often, it is denigrating your predecessor. It is not worthy of you. It is certainly not worthy of London politics.

Sadiq Khan: Chair, I am afraid I am disappointed that the AssemblyMember in his last opportunity does not put on record the fact that it is important for us to have a future that is green, for us to have a future that thinks of our children and of our grandchildren. London Power is one way we will be supporting the environment by making sure that all of the products it provides are renewable, which is something that others cannot do. I am disappointed in his lack of support for the future. I wish him well, though, in his retirement.

Navin Shah: Thank you, MrMayor. We have an intervention and another question on this matter from AssemblyMemberCooper.

Crossrail

Caroline Pidgeon: Which predictions about the expected opening date of Crossrail should Londonerstrust?

Sadiq Khan: A huge amount of work is ongoing across the Crossrail project and it is anticipated that the central section between Paddington and Abbey Wood will open for passenger services in the first half of 2022. Full through services from Reading and Heathrow in the west and between Abbey Wood and Shenfield in the east are due to be in operation six to 12 months after the opening of the central section.
Of course, Elizabeth line trains are already running as stand-alone services out of both Paddington and Liverpool Street, providing a high-quality service for Londoners who have been needing to travel.
Crossrail remains on track to commence trial running this spring [2021]. This will mark a pivotal milestone for the programme when it shifts from a construction project to an operational railway. The focus will be on building reliability in the systems, signalling and trains. Crossrail is committed to safely entering this phase at the earliest opportunity.
The past month has also seen significant progress in Crossrail’s efforts to complete and handover the newly built central section stations with Farringdon becoming the first to be handed over to TfL on 5March [2020]. Both Tottenham Court Road and Paddington Stations have also started the countdown process to handover.
As the Assembly’s Transport Committee noted in its recent report, this project will deliver huge benefits to London and the rest of the UK and will play a key part in the capital’s economic recovery from the pandemic.

Caroline Pidgeon: Thank you, MrMayor. Can you explain why at today’s Elizabeth Line Committee the papers state that a review of the delivery timetable will take place this spring [2021]? Will that review of the timetable be immediately published? Does this suggest that further delays are likely to the opening of Crossrail?

Sadiq Khan: Firstly, you will forgive me. I have not seen the Committee papers but I am more than happy to look at them later on today.
In relation to trial running, I mentioned in my opening, Caroline, that it is going to be this spring. I suspect it may be to do with how long trial running is going to run for. With your permission, can I come back to you later on today or this week about what that meant?

Caroline Pidgeon: Absolutely. Can you give an assurance that throughout this year all the decisions by the Office of Rail and Road (ORR) relating to the required authorisation of Crossrail infrastructure and rolling stock will be immediately published?

Sadiq Khan: One of the big changes - and thanks for your support on this - in it being completely TfL in charge of the project, only very recently, is that we have far more ownership over a number of decisions and also transparency. Where it is our stuff, we will make it transparent urgently. Your question illustrates the change in us taking this over and the fact you are able to have that information.
In relation to the ORR stuff, again, with your permission, can I check that and get back to you today to let you know what the view is? I am very keen for there to be maximum transparency. Now there is no reason not to because we are in charge of this now for the first time.

Caroline Pidgeon: Yes, it is really important for us to have confidence in the next steps so that we can see. If there are challenges, Londoners need to see that.

Sadiq Khan: Absolutely. Do not forget that it is not just residents who are affected. They have bought a home and moved into a home because a station is arriving. Many businesses have as well. Transparency is not a bad thing. The sooner we let people know good news or bad news, the better. I do not have the detail but let me go away and get back to you about what is possible. There should be transparency, as much as possible.

Caroline Pidgeon: Thank you. Finally, given comments reported yesterday by TfL’s Chief Finance Officer that Crossrail is running out of cash once again, can you guarantee that Londoners are not going to wake up to hear more bad news about the progress in completing Crossrail in the coming months?

Sadiq Khan: The issue with bad news is that often it is last-minute and they are decisions that as a normal person you would think, “Why did you not know this X months ago?” What I can promise you is that there will be no surprises at the last minute. We will give you advance notice. You will know in recent times, Caroline, we have given people significant months of notice about challenges rather than what we had a couple of years ago when in August we were told that the line would be opening in December. That cannot be right. What I can promise is that as soon as we know stuff, we will share it. What I cannot promise for obvious reasons is that there will not be further issues that will lead to your displeasure and mine.

Caroline Pidgeon: Thank you very much indeed.

Covid Death Rate of London Bus Drivers

Keith Prince: Based on TfL and ONS data, why do London bus drivers have twice the Covid death rate per 100,000 of the most dangerous occupations nationally and twice the rate of bus drivers nationally?

Sadiq Khan: Let me start by saying that all the deaths of transport workers in London and across the country are tragic and my thoughts remain with their families, friends and colleagues. It saddens me deeply to say that 88 transport workers have died in the pandemic in London, including 51 bus drivers employed by bus operators.
On the specific figures mentioned by AssemblyMemberPrince, I am not clear what datasets he is comparing, but a sophisticated piece of statistical analysis would need to be carried out to make the assertion he has made.
The Office for National Statistics (ONS) data for COVID deaths by occupation was not broken down by region and the ONS website makes it clear that comparisons should not be made using that data and data published elsewhere.
Nevertheless, we know from the research TfL commissioned from University College London’s (UCL) Institute of Health Equity that certainly in the first phase of the pandemic, London bus drivers were worse affected than bus drivers in other parts of the country. There are a number of reasons for this, including the fact that the first wave of COVID hit London very hard, particularly as it was before the national lockdown, the high number of bus drivers in London who are older, issues around comorbidity and the high proportion of drivers in London who are BAME.
We have made huge efforts over the last year to protect staff and customers on TfL’s services. In fact, many bus operators around the country have emulated the work done in London. Stringent safety measures have been introduced, including cleaning with long-lasting antiviral cleaning fluid and limits on passenger numbers to allow for social distancing. Staff facilities have been reconfigured to enable better social distancing and temporary portacabin facilities have been constructed to enable staff to spread out. Bus ventilation systems have been improved and drivers’ cabs have been fully sealed up to reduce the risk of transmission following UCL’s work on cab design and air flow. For a period last year, passengers were able to embark and disembark only from the rear doors to keep commuters away from drivers.
Since August2020 Imperial College London has been testing for COVID on the TfL network, taking samples from the air and frequently touched services in stations, trains and buses. All results to date have been negative. No trace of COVID-19 has been found.
I would be more than happy to ask for TfL to sit down with AssemblyMemberPrince to go through the data we have available and to discuss with him the actions taken and continuing to be taken to protect staff and customers.

Keith Prince: I am very grateful for that offer, MrMayor, and I will happily take you up on that. I would also like to bring some experts with me as well, if that is at all possible. That is very generous of you, I must say.
Do you feel, though, in retrospect that there may have been done decisions that you could or should have taken and maybe there should have been some questions that you asked?

Sadiq Khan: I reflect on that regularly, Keith, as you will appreciate, because we are talking about people here. That is one of the reasons why we got world experts with UCL’s Institute of Health Equity to look into that. I was not happy with just TfL marking our own homework. We got UCL in with very wide terms of reference. The part 2 report is going to come out soon and maybe that will tell us things that we should have done at the time that we did not do.
One thing that gives me comfort is that nobody else among the bus operators was doing more than us at the time and in fact others have copied what we have done. We continue to evolve but, if there are things we could have done differently, we have to learn. So far, nothing has been brought to light, but we have to be open-minded about it and not closed-minded.

Keith Prince: MrMayor, perhaps I could bring some things to light, maybe around the mess offices or the canteens where the drivers were meeting and also ferry cars. It is interesting. Why was UCL not asked to look at the COVID risks in relation to clusters such as canteens and also conditions for ferry drivers? Why was that not included in the UCL research, MrMayor?

Sadiq Khan: You will find that the main concern that UCL looked into was the issue of bus drivers because of the number of bus workers who lost their lives. They are not employed by TfL - you know this - but are employed by bus operators. We were still concerned by the large numbers and that was the focus.
Again, there is nothing stopping TfL and we are doing further work in relation to other transport workers, not just buses, not just ferries, but trams, the Overground and the Tube as well‑‑

Keith Prince: Sorry, MrMayor. Sorry to interrupt you. When I talk about ferry drivers, I do not mean the people who are catching ferries. I mean the people who drive cars full of bus drivers to and from where they are meeting for the change of driver. I do apologise for not making that clear.

Sadiq Khan: I beg your pardon.

Keith Prince: When I am talking about ferry drivers, I am talking about drivers who are tasked to take bus drivers to where they meet for their bus changeovers. Apologies for not making that clear.

Sadiq Khan: No, it is my fault. Government guidance, as you will appreciate, AssemblyMemberPrince, was changing along the way, not just from the Government but from Public Health England. At all times, TfL was slightly ahead of Government guidance when we were able to be so, but we had to follow Government guidance. As soon as Government guidance changed in relation to, for example, as you will be aware, the use of face masks and face coverings in vehicles, it was a change made in relation to bus operators as well.

Keith Prince: MrMayor, UCL did not look at that aspect. That is a bit of a failing, to be blunt.

Sadiq Khan: I am not sure that is right, though, because --

Keith Prince: Perhaps we could talk about this in our meeting --

Sadiq Khan: Phase 2 of the UCL report is going to look at other things. They include things outside of the bus service. If there is an issue in relation to the ferrying of bus workers, it will be covered by phase 2 from UCL because it is looking at other issues.

Keith Prince: OK. If I can be really cheeky, as you are in the mind to have a meeting, the Association of Relocation Professionals estimates that over 20,000 high-value employees of professionals move into the London economy every year. Will you agree to a short meeting with the relocation industry representatives to discuss ways in which we can make London a go-to destination, bearing in mind what you were saying earlier, MrMayor?

Sadiq Khan: Should I be re-elected, I would be more than happy to, personally. If it is the case you want a meeting sooner rather than later, I am happy for TfL to meet with them. Keith, purdah starts from Monday [22March2021] and so it is difficult. If it is possible and if you want me, I can do it after 6May [2021] should I be re-elected. If you want it sooner, it will be with officials rather than me, if that is OK.

Keith Prince: OK. Thank you, MrMayor. Thank you.

A budget for London?

Leonie Cooper: Did the Chancellor’s budget on the 3rd March 2021 provide London with the support it needs as it exits lockdown?

Sadiq Khan: No, it did not. I welcome the introduction of some of the short-term measures I have long been calling for - the extension of the business rates holiday, the furlough scheme, the value-added tax (VAT) reduction and extra support for some of the self-employed - but the Budget failed to address how the United Kingdom (UK) will build back better from this national crisis, the biggest we have faced since the Second World War.
Over 300,000 Londoners have lost their jobs during the pandemic and we have more people claiming Universal Credit than anywhere else in the country. The Budget failed to address this or the underlying inequalities in our society. Along with others, I called for the £20 uplift in Universal Credit to be made permanent, for the benefit cap to be lifted and for the no-recourse-to-public-funds condition to be suspended, with an increase to statutory sick pay for those who cannot afford to self-isolate. I called for a job guarantee scheme to protect Londoners who have lost their jobs from falling into long-term unemployment. None of these changes was forthcoming. There was also nothing for our public services, which have been at the front line of the pandemic. There was a pitiful 1% pay rise for National Health Service (NHS) staff who have worked so hard to protect us.
If the country is going to recover from this crisis, we need London to do well, but there was nothing in the Budget that gave me the confidence that the Government understands that. Take the £4.8billion Levelling Up Fund that was announced alongside the Budget. I fully support levelling-up places across the country, but that cannot mean making London poorer. That would make all of our country poorer. According to the Chancellor [The Rt Hon Rishi Sunak MP], communities in deprived London boroughs such as Tower Hamlets are less deserving of investment than those in his own leafy constituency of Richmond in North Yorkshire. Starving London of investment is self-defeating. London’s economy accounts for a quarter of the UK’s total economic output and contributes a net £38.7billion to the Treasury.

Léonie Cooper: MrMayor, thank you very much for that comprehensive answer. There was much good in the Budget but of course, for Londoners, it really did not deliver, as you say.
I wonder if I could home in on what you were saying about the Levelling Up Fund. It is bizarre that it seems to have been applied to places including transport links as a key element.
Do you think it would be really helpful for everybody to see the full methodology published to allay concerns that very deprived parts of London and elsewhere in the country are losing out because of some political ploy?

Sadiq Khan: Further scrutiny of the allocation of funds from the Chancellor has shown the criteria were partisan issues rather than issues that were objectively measured in a fair and transparent way. One of the concerns that many independent commentators have is that the money does not appear to be going to those areas that have been most affected by the pandemic or to those areas that are crucial to our country’s recovery. I gently say to the Government that it is in nobody’s interests to play party politics with the country’s recovery. It is in all of our interests to get our country back on its feet as soon as possible, particularly once lockdown has lifted.

Léonie Cooper: I completely agree with that. London is quite often described as the engine of the rest of the UK’s recovery and yet I know that one of my colleagues in this virtual Chamber says that London gets the begging bowl out and that London is getting a very good deal from the Government. He has been criticising you for continuing to ask for more.
Is there any time when you are going to stop putting your role on behalf of Londoners as central to your demands for making sure that London gets its fair share?

Sadiq Khan: One of the jobs of the Mayor of this great city is to be a champion and an advocate for this great city and even sometimes fighting for this great city. This city is not served well by somebody who is in the pocket of the Prime Minister and who is more keen to be a sycophant than to argue on London’s behalf. I will continue to work constructively with the Government when it is in our city’s interests to do so but I will not be scared to say boo to a goose.

Léonie Cooper: I agree, MrMayor. Cosying up to the Government and caving in is not what London needs. The Budget failed to deliver additional funding for the MPS and the Fire Brigade. It failed to help councils in London. There was no mention of course of social care. It failed to find the funding needed to offer our NHS heroes a proper pay rise. It is a Budget that is levelling down London rather than levelling up the country.
What plans do you have to mitigate against the new era of austerity that I am suspecting is coming towards public services in general for both councils and City Hall?

Sadiq Khan: Although we have limited powers from City Hall, we are doing what we can to support our city. You will be aware that only this week we announced a bumper package of measures as part of our Recovery Summit. For the first time ever, we have managed to convene all of the leaders of our city from the business community to the faith and voluntary communities, from trade unions to all our
public-sector institutions. That bumper package of measures this week is north of £500million.
We have to do what we can to avoid our city facing a recession like we did in the 1980s and to have the vision and ambition, as our forefathers and foremothers did after the Second World War, to immediately build back better. That is why it is important that the Mayor of this city is a champion and an advocate for this city and that is what I intend to do should I have the pleasure of being re-elected on 6May [2021].

Léonie Cooper: Thank you, MrMayor. I wondered if I could go back to something you mentioned earlier, which was about unemployment. You were mentioning that you did not believe that the budget had really done anything to counter the predicted rise in London’s unemployment. What more can be done to help in this area from the Government helping you?

Sadiq Khan: Over the last 12 months, the bad news is that we think more than 300,000 Londoners have lost their jobs. The concern is that as the furlough scheme ends in September [2021], more Londoners will lose their jobs. Unfortunately, the boroughs where there are the largest numbers of Londoners furloughed are not only the most deprived parts of our city but also the parts with the largest numbers of black, Asian and minority ethnic [BAME] Londoners.
What we are doing from City Hall in the absence of support from the Government - and the key thing the Government could do is a national jobs guarantee - is we are pivoting some of the adult education funds we have to help those people stay in their jobs where they can, to retrain those Londoners to get them other jobs and also to speedily support those who have been made unemployed and get them back into work as soon as possible. In the meantime, a number of the missions we have - nine missions in total - are geared towards making sure that our economy in London is a futureproofed green one that supports jobs going forward.

Léonie Cooper: Additionally, I noticed that on International Women’s Day last week you committed to ensuring our city’s recovery from this pandemic works for women. Women have been hit worst economically while men have been hit worst in terms of health.
How will the London Recovery Board address the pattern of rising unemployment and economic inequality that is afflicting women through the nine missions?

Sadiq Khan: One of the things this pandemic has done is not just to expose the structural inequalities in our city but to exacerbate them. It is a startling fact that 50% more mothers have lost their jobs during the pandemic than fathers. That is a combination of childcare and home-schooling and also the types of work that women in London have traditionally been doing.
Two thirds of the adult education budget we have is supporting women. We have to do what we can to make sure that women are getting the skills they need in futureproofed well-paid jobs. Think of tech, think of green, think of creative and think also of those opportunities in health and social care as well. We will do what we can with the limited powers and funds we have to support women during this difficult period.

Léonie Cooper: Thank you very much, MrMayor. It is great to have a feminist in City Hall. Thank you, Chair.